PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

gordondaviesmoustache said:
I’ve felt for some time that Carragher sails far closer to the wind in terms of what he says about City’s finances than pretty much any other mainstream broadcaster. He’s essentially accusing the club of committing industrial scale fraud there, in terms of our turnover numbers. I don’t think there’s any other reasonable way of evaluating what he’s said there in the penultimate paragraph.

It also exposes an inability (or wilful blindness) to undertake a simple analysis of the numbers, because City’s turnover is essentially pretty simple maths that is significantly made up in recent years of the largest TV revenue of any team in world football and huge levels of prize money, figures for which are readily and publicly available, especially to someone like Carragher. It’s actually pretty straightforward to see where the rump of City’s revenue comes from, given how successful we’ve been over the last decade. Any person with a modicum of understanding about simple accountancy principles should be able to grasp how the numbers are broadly arrived at.

Thinking this through logically, Carragher would certainly not be questioning the club’s turnover if it wasn’t for the subsistence of the 115 charges. They plainly embolden him and provide a gateway for him to do so. On the basis the relevant charges are dismissed ((or equivalent) I also have no doubt that he will desist from questioning the numbers and/or will be restrained from so doing by the legal bods at the various broadcasters he works for. Given all that, if those charges are dismissed, I wonder what steps (if any) the club will take against him personally, given what he has repeatedly said has gone beyond the routine nods, winks and innuendo.

Maybe they’ll just leave it, or simply be happy to accept a public apology, but I do think he’s exposed himself in a way that pretty much the rest of his cohort haven’t.
Click to expand...
Carraghers main issue is he is just not very intelligent. That fact will always go against him. I hope the club take him to the cleaners after the judgement. I would like to see him ruined financially. I have loathed him since the day he spat in that childs face and his employers stood by him. What kind of people do that?
 
Kinkys Left Foot said:
He and his rat faced friend still seem unable to grasp the basic economic principle that a team that won the treble in a season (in the richest league in the world) and added the supercup and club world Cup would maximise their sponsorship income (winners bonuses), maximise their TV income (more games on the box than anybody else so more dosh) and max their trophy winners income all in the same year.
Who does he think should have earned more than City that year? Scousepool for winning the Carabou Cup because they have more fans in Malaysia? Do fuck off Jamie you thick scouse ****. They live in the fantasy land that thinks clubs earn big money from shirt sales. They don't.
Click to expand...

What I find most annoying is that no-one has ever been allowed to point out these most basic facts to him and he is allowed to go on these completely ill-informed rants whilst completely unchallenged.
 
halfcenturyup said:
Just as a little balance, imho, he isn't saying anything libellous, I don't think. Is he? It may be stupid and annoying as fuck to fans, but I just don't see it.

Let's face it, the PL is effectively accusing the club of fraud around sponsorships and, in my view at least, of overstating sponsorships from related parties. What he says may be stupid and uneducated from a financial standpoint, but I don't see how it is causing any damage in the face of the PL allegations which are specific, well documented, understood by you legal professionals and, of course, actually incredibly damaging merely by being alleged.
Click to expand...
There’s a word of difference between a regulatory body exercising its powers under an agreement and in relation to rules that another party is subject to, which that party has the opportunity to respond to in an agreed setting and format - and a private individual stating on a public broadcast that a business’ turnover figures are false, and thereby dishonestly arrived at.

fwiw (probably not at lot) I think it is libellous, yes, assuming his assertion that the accounts are false is not true, which I’m sure it’s not.
 
halfcenturyup said:
Just as a little balance, imho, he isn't saying anything libellous, I don't think. Is he? It may be stupid and annoying as fuck to fans, but I just don't see it.

Let's face it, the PL is effectively accusing the club of fraud around sponsorships and, in my view at least, of overstating sponsorships from related parties. What he says may be stupid and uneducated from a financial standpoint, but I don't see how it is causing any damage in the face of the PL allegations which are specific, well documented, understood by you legal professionals and, of course, actually incredibly damaging merely by being alleged.

I may be wrong, but it seems to me he is just a stupid, bitter old man shouting into the wind of the PL allegations.

Best to ignore.
Click to expand...
Its not libel but it falls under the dictionary definition of defamation, he is asserting that it is impossible that we generate as much as revenue as we do so basically saying not only are our past accounts false but our current ones too.
 
jaiguruKun said:
What I find most annoying is that no-one has ever been allowed to point out these most basic facts to him and he is allowed to go on these completely ill-informed rants whilst completely unchallenged.
Click to expand...


The rants are clickbait for the red top viewers, SKY want him to go off on one as do TNT and the rest because they are feeding their market.

ALL media are the same now, it's all about the views.
 
wolviedinho said:
Spit badmouthing us again to the American audience. Basically calling our accounts fraudulent. According to Sky we don’t have any viewers because people don’t care yet he won’t shut the fuck up the spitting tramp. This interview in a nutshell is every bitter, twisted, jealous red cartel view.

No mention we won the recent case and no mention that we had the biggest audience last year from the states.

On Manchester City's legal case​

GOAL: I wanted to ask about Man City and the 115 charges against them for alleged breaches of Premier League rules. How do you think that gets resolved?
Carragher: You know what? I'm not sure it ever gets resolved. Because I think in some ways, no matter what happens, if City are found to be proven not guilty, I think most people in the country, certainly fans of rival teams will all believe they have done it - it's just that they've got the best lawyers. So it'll never go away.

And if they are found guilty, City will come out and say, ‘It was persecution from the Premier League - United, Liverpool and Arsenal don't want the new kids in town coming and taking their trophies,’ or, ‘that’s the world we live in.’
I'm just tired and bored of it, if I'm being honest. Some of the things City claim… sometimes I just can't believe… when they claim that they bring in more revenue than anybody else, like Real Madrid, and teams like that, I’m like, ‘behave.”

"If they broke the rules that they signed up for as every other Premier League club did, they should be punished, and punished very, very heavily." - Carragher, on charges against Man City​


I know that myself in the media, if I do a newspaper article on Liverpool or Man United, the amount of clicks is going to get compared to City because people aren't as interested in Manchester City. That's not a criticism, that's just a fact. We know that from viewing figures on Sky Sports. If Man United or Liverpool play they go through the roof. If Manchester City, it doesn't move the needle. And again, it's not a criticism, it's just a fact.
We know those things. They’re facts. So for City to say that they bring in more revenue than some of the biggest clubs in the Premier League or Real Madrid is just a nonsense.

But we want it over. We want to be talking about football on the pitch. Manchester City, they’ve got an unbelievable manager, an unbelievable team. We want to get back to judging them as a football team on the pitch, but if they broke the rules that they signed up for as every other Premier League club did, they should be punished, and punished very, very heavily.
Click to expand...
Carragher is quite stunningly stupid. As if City control assessments of revenue done by global giants such as Deloittes, Forbes. The man is a complete fucking cretin.
 
wolviedinho said:
Spit badmouthing us again to the American audience. Basically calling our accounts fraudulent. According to Sky we don’t have any viewers because people don’t care yet he won’t shut the fuck up the spitting tramp. This interview in a nutshell is every bitter, twisted, jealous red cartel view.

No mention we won the recent case and no mention that we had the biggest audience last year from the states.

On Manchester City's legal case​

GOAL: I wanted to ask about Man City and the 115 charges against them for alleged breaches of Premier League rules. How do you think that gets resolved?
Carragher: You know what? I'm not sure it ever gets resolved. Because I think in some ways, no matter what happens, if City are found to be proven not guilty, I think most people in the country, certainly fans of rival teams will all believe they have done it - it's just that they've got the best lawyers. So it'll never go away.

And if they are found guilty, City will come out and say, ‘It was persecution from the Premier League - United, Liverpool and Arsenal don't want the new kids in town coming and taking their trophies,’ or, ‘that’s the world we live in.’
I'm just tired and bored of it, if I'm being honest. Some of the things City claim… sometimes I just can't believe… when they claim that they bring in more revenue than anybody else, like Real Madrid, and teams like that, I’m like, ‘behave.”

"If they broke the rules that they signed up for as every other Premier League club did, they should be punished, and punished very, very heavily." - Carragher, on charges against Man City​


I know that myself in the media, if I do a newspaper article on Liverpool or Man United, the amount of clicks is going to get compared to City because people aren't as interested in Manchester City. That's not a criticism, that's just a fact. We know that from viewing figures on Sky Sports. If Man United or Liverpool play they go through the roof. If Manchester City, it doesn't move the needle. And again, it's not a criticism, it's just a fact.
We know those things. They’re facts. So for City to say that they bring in more revenue than some of the biggest clubs in the Premier League or Real Madrid is just a nonsense.

But we want it over. We want to be talking about football on the pitch. Manchester City, they’ve got an unbelievable manager, an unbelievable team. We want to get back to judging them as a football team on the pitch, but if they broke the rules that they signed up for as every other Premier League club did, they should be punished, and punished very, very heavily.
Click to expand...

Does he think people who spit at children whilst driving should be punished very, very heavily?
 
mancboy said:
Its not libel but it falls under the dictionary definition of defamation, he is asserting that it is impossible that we generate as much as revenue as we do so basically saying not only are our past accounts false but our current ones too.
Click to expand...

Unless I am wrong, and I frequently am, libel is just defamation in written form (put simply).

And he isn't saying our accounts are wrong, he is saying he can't understand why our turnover is higher than other clubs. He is being stupid not libellous, imho, especially when he can point to two things: the ongoing case which alleged fraudulent recognition of sponsorship and, I think, the overstatement of sponsorship income from related parties; and the conclusions of the (partially) completed case that rules were required to stop overstated sponsorship from associated parties specifically because of the UEFA investigation into the club and the current PL investigation. And even on top of all that, some sort of damage would have to be shown, I think?

He has enough to say his lack of understanding is justified, at least until the 115 are settled in favour of the club, imho.

Anyway, I realise this is an unpopular, and possibly bollocks, opinion, so I will shut up :)
 
oldius said:
This is exactly the same as the other Liverpool fans I spoke to. They have been spoon-fed glory, righteousness, European nights, and the noise of the Kop since they were babies. They cannot accept that another has superseded them. They refute ALL evidence of such. They will not accept that it is for any reason other than corruption or cheating. If we win, they will not accept it. If we lose, they are the rightful champions and saviours of the game.
Click to expand...

They’ve been superseded 33 times in the last 34 years so that is some chronic long term mental illness right there.
 
halfcenturyup said:
Unless I am wrong, and I frequently am, libel is just defamation in written form (put simply).

And he isn't saying our accounts are wrong, he is saying he can't understand why our turnover is higher than other clubs. He is being stupid not libellous, imho, especially when he can point to two things: the ongoing case which alleged fraudulent recognition of sponsorship and, I think, the overstatement of sponsorship income from related parties; and the conclusions of the (partially) completed case that rules were required to stop overstated sponsorship from associated parties specifically because of the UEFA investigation into the club and the current PL investigation. And even on top of all that, some sort of damage would have to be shown, I think?

He has enough to say his lack of understanding is justified, at least until the 115 are settled in favour of the club, imho.

Anyway, I realise this is an unpopular, and possibly bollocks, opinion, so I will shut up :)
Click to expand...
Some of the things City claim… sometimes I just can't believe… when they claim that they bring in more revenue than anybody else, like Real Madrid, and teams like that, I’m like, ‘behave.”

Thats not being stupid that is in print and libelous right there my friend, its not just the context of whats being said its where it is being said and the person that is saying it that is also taken into account, if you or i said it here then it counts for nothing, but carragher is a broadcaster for not one but 2 organisations so for him to put that out in an interview is different altogether.
 
halfcenturyup said:
Unless I am wrong, and I frequently am, libel is just defamation in written form (put simply).

And he isn't saying our accounts are wrong, he is saying he can't understand why our turnover is higher than other clubs. He is being stupid not libellous, imho, especially when he can point to two things: the ongoing case which alleged fraudulent recognition of sponsorship and, I think, the overstatement of sponsorship income from related parties; and the conclusions of the (partially) completed case that rules were required to stop overstated sponsorship from associated parties specifically because of the UEFA investigation into the club and the current PL investigation. And even on top of all that, some sort of damage would have to be shown, I think?

He has enough to say his lack of understanding is justified, at least until the 115 are settled in favour of the club, imho.

Anyway, I realise this is an unpopular, and possibly bollocks, opinion, so I will shut up :)
Click to expand...
Lol, fair enough, but can we agree he is utterly stupid?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top